Back pain is a common and significant mallady afflicting large numbers of people and virtually every country of the world. The wide spread nature of the problem has been highlighted in numerous articles printed in both medical and news periodicals. Illustrative are articles entitled Bare-bones Facts About Your Aching Back from the December, 1980 issue of Readers Digest and the cover story from the Jul. 14, 1980 issue of Time magazine.
Axial traction has been shown to be effective in treating certain types of low back ailments, in preventing back ailments and in producing and sustaining low back health. Such traction has been found to be an effective means of realigning improperly aligned or displaced vertebral elements as well as their associated invertebral discs and soft tissues. Such traction when used periodically for sustained periods has also been shown to reduce herniated contained intervertebral discs. Further, such traction has also been shown (in muscle and ligament injury or insult) to reduce spasm and inflammation, enhance blood flow and to promote optimal healing. Certain circumstances have, however, long presented obstacles to the effective application of controlled traction to the lumbar area. These circumstances include the significant amount of force which must be applied, the lack of a location at which the axially directed force can be applied, and the position of the person during which the axial force is being applied.
In 1971, Charles Burton, M.D. provided for the construction of an apparatus to support a person, such person having one of a number of conditions such as a protruded lumbar disc, in a vertical position wherein the torso of the person was suspended from above by a chest harness and vest encircling the rib cage. As a result of related research and experience, it has been demonstrated scientifically and conclusively that the rib cage can serve as an optimum site of fixation and does serve well this purpose. In order for the overhead harness vest to function most effectively, it was observed that it should, at its lower end, be tightened beneath the rib cage so that, as axial force is applied by the body's weight to the harness, the rib cage will not slide out of the harness of vest.
After continued research, an improved gravity traction vest was developed. Prior to this time, the tightening of a lower most belt of the gravity vest was accomplished exclusively by providing a belt having a sufficient number of locking points whereby the belt could be tightened so that it was within the perimeter of the rib cage regardless of the size of the person being treated. The new improved gravity traction vest (shown in U.S. Pat. No. 4,422,452) provided means whereby axial fixation could be efficiently accomplished, yet wherein the treatment is not rendered uncomfortable.
While the improved second generation gravity traction vest provided improvement over the original gravity traction vest, there remained a number of problems associated with its use. These problems included the need to tighten a number of cinctures to secure the vest to the person, the rough surfaces of the cinctures being felt through the vest by the person. While there was an improved locking of the vest to the person due to a cushion insert, it was desirable to provide for still more positive locking. The need to provide improved comfort to the person has always been a goal which each new generation of product has tried to accomplish. The goal was to provide a vest which allowed the person to experience gravity traction without causing unnecessary discomfort. While there has been improvement in this area, there has been the need for still more improvement.
It is these problems in the prior art that a third generation gravity traction vest was developed. It provides for a torso surrounding member being constructed of a rigid material, a simple and effective means for securing the vest to the person and a flanged under portion that protrudes inwardly toward the person for engagement below both the lowest rib and the inverted U-shaped area of the rib cage. U.S. Pat. No. 4,569,340 was issued on Feb. 11, 1986 on such a vest.
While such vests have been utilized for many persons and have proved quite successful, all of the vests to date have required overhead support of the vest. This is a drawback in that such devices are large and cumbersome and are best utilized in a hospital or clinic setting.
Alternative supports for applying gravity traction have been suggested, but none has yet found wide acceptance. For example, U.S. Pat. No. 3,353,532 issued to L. C. Ellis describes a traction apparatus wherein support is provided to a patient by side members and does not utilize a vest which encircles the patient's body. However, such a device has not proven to the practical in that there is no means for force to be applied gradually to the spine. Still further, the side members appear to work by a simple compression from just underneath the armpits of the patient to just above the waist of the patient. This is very uncomfortable to many users.
In a somewhat similar fashion, U.S. Pat. No. 4,583,533 issued to Paul H. Goodley et al describes an orthopedic lumbar apparatus for treating back ailments by use of two corselets which are connected to surround the torso and which are attached to struts that may be engaged when the person is either standing or sitting.
The successful prior art devices have tended to be vests and have accordingly encircled the torso of the person using the device. Although the vests have been employed successfully, one of the inherent drawbacks of a vest is that a large portion of the torso is encircled and breathing can be somewhat restricted as the tightly cinched vest covers the rib cage. Further, because the torso is encircled, there is a greater heat build up for the person. Further, because of the total device design, the person is somewhat restricted from accomplishing movement of the body such that beneficial tissue exercise can not be accomplished. In addition, the overall devices of previous apparatus have tended to be large, relatively expensive and not easily transportable.
Dr. Charles Burton, one of the applicants of the present application, has two pending applications, U.S. Ser. Nos. 301,172 and 301,176, both filed Jan. 24, 1989. These applications disclose devices for transferring stress to the lumbar spine to a rib cage of a person and do not use overhead support. Further, the device disclosed in Ser. No. 301,172 includes both a seat member and a support member. The person assumes a seating position on the seat member and is also supported thereby. The amount of support provided the person by the seat member and the support member may be varied, thereby transferring varying amounts of stress from the lumbar spine to the rib cage of the person utilizing the device. While both of the devices disclosed in the two above-noted applications are improvements over the prior art, applicants have found several significant areas to improve the traction devices.